A federal judicial panel has dismissed a lawsuit that alleged Tennessee’s U.S. House and state Senate maps were drawn to dilute the voting power of Black voters and other communities of color, amounting to unconstitutional racial gerrymandering.
Court Ruling: Political, Not Racial Gerrymandering
In their ruling, issued on Wednesday, the judges acknowledged that the complaint presented facts consistent with racial gerrymandering but argued that these facts also aligned with political gerrymandering. The lawsuit marked the first legal challenge against a 2022 congressional redistricting map that divided Nashville, a Democratic stronghold, into three districts, helping Republicans gain a seat in last year’s elections.
The lawsuit also contested the redrawing of state Senate District 31 in majority-Black Shelby County, which includes part of Memphis. The plaintiffs argued that the district’s white voting age population increased under the new map, leading to a Republican victory in the seat.
The three-judge panel, however, pointed to “naked partisanship” as the more straightforward explanation for the redistricting, suggesting that Tennessee’s Republican supermajority in the state legislature was motivated by political, rather than racial, considerations.
Supreme Court Precedent and Implications
The ruling follows a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision that partisan gerrymandering claims fall outside federal jurisdiction, limiting such disputes to state courts. This decision effectively shields political gerrymandering from federal challenges, though racial gerrymandering remains subject to legal scrutiny.
The lawsuit in Tennessee was brought by several groups, including the Tennessee State Conference of the NAACP, the African American Clergy Collective of Tennessee, and the League of Women Voters of Tennessee. The plaintiffs argued that the redistricting efforts diluted the influence of minority voters, pointing to the defeat of Democratic candidates in the newly configured districts.
Judicial Findings and Future Legal Actions
The judges ruled that the plaintiffs failed to plausibly allege that Tennessee legislators intentionally harmed minority voters by redrawing the districts. However, the court did leave the door open for the plaintiffs to refile their complaint within 30 days, provided they could better differentiate between racial and political motivations in the redistricting process.
Despite the dismissal, the judges rejected Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti’s claim that the lawsuit was filed too late and ruled that the plaintiffs were not required to propose an alternative map as part of their legal challenge.
